The Keno Human Services Prevention Fund Advisory Committee chose to fund
three old programs and five new programs (see Exhibit A). Boesch asked
that these recommendations be forwarded to the individual governmental
bodies for final approval.

Morgan commented that the LRTP process began in January of 2000 and is on
schedule. The need to update the LRTP came about for two reasons - a
federal mandate stating that LRTP's must be updated every five years and
the need to outline designated road improvements made since 1994 (year of
last LRTP update). He added that a series of meetings have been
conducted with City and County officials. There was also an organized
public involvement process which included the formation of a nine-member
task force to review the LRTP.

Morgan said an assumption was made during the process that the future
land use plan was not changed. Also, a base network was developed which
included all model runs and looked at where the deficiencies were in the
system. Fiscal constraints were reviewed and a number of alternatives
where considered before making recommendations. A particular set of
evaluation criteria was used, i.e., economic and environmental issues.
All this information was presented to the LRTP Task Force before deriving
at a preferred network. The process is now at the point of public review
and will eventually become part of the Comprehensive Plan/LRTP
modification process.

Morgan noted that there are a number of controversial issues included in
the review of the LRTP, one being the beltway. There has not been a
decision on the beltway thus far, but plans had to move forward with the
LRTP which would inevitably include the beltway. Therefore, with the
agreement of the LRTP Task Force, the study used the south and mid-east
alignments FOR ANALYSIS PURPOSES ONLY. Morgan said there has been NO
RECOMMENDATION that these are the approved routes.

For study purposes, it was also assumed that the Antelope Valley project
would be built in its entirety, that Interstate 80 would be expanded to
six lanes and enhancements would be made to the basic core of the ridge
network in the north and south fringe areas.

Morgan stated that a number of candidate options were reviewed in
earnest. They included:

Antelope Valley - Six Lane v. Four Lane Facility

Highway 2 Expansion to Six Lanes

Crossing Wilderness Park; Yankee Hill Road

West Lincoln Improvements

Completion of 98th Street

In reference to Exhibit D, Morgan reiterated that the two key
elements of this process with regard to the LRTP are that the goals of
the existing Comprehensive Plan did not change and the land use plan did
not change. He went on to discuss the eleven highlights as outlined in
Exhibit D, re-emphasizing that the beltway and Antelope Valley proposals
REMAIN AS STUDIES - there have been NO DECISIONS on these issues thus
far.

Camp questioned if City and County standards, i.e., the variance in road
bids and related annexation, are in conformity as there may be some
benefit to having this uniformity. Morgan said they are working with Don
Thomas, County Engineer, on this very issue. Figard said the two primary
differences between urban and rural roads are that rural roads are built
higher with drainage ditches; urban areas generally have the road lower
with curb and gutter, allowing the water to drain off the property and
collect in the storm sewer system. As the City has grown, many of the
older rural roads have been lowered to mesh with the urban roads.
During the past 18 months, grading on newer rural roads has been lowered
in anticipation of expansion. Discussion continues on ways to save
dollars, effort and the County's infrastructure on future projects.

Figard stated that the beltway and Antelope Valley projects do continue
to show "study" status with regard to updating the LRTP. He added that
all decisions and recommendations made to date are predicated on the fact
that the community will elect to move ahead with both projects. If
throughout the planning process either project is eliminated, the heart
of the LRTP would go away and the process would have to start over. He
stressed that the projects need for public and government official
approval.

In regard to Antelope Valley, Figard noted that August 29 is the deadline
for the extended public response comment period on the draft
environmental impact statement. Public hearings were held on August
1st and 2nd. Many comments were gathered and are being
addressed. During the last week of September, an evening meeting of the
Planning Commission will be held at which time the amended draft single
package of the Antelope Valley plan will be presented. A vote would
hopefully take place at the October Planning Commission meeting. The
City Council could be seeing the issue on its agenda by the end of
October or early November. Figard stressed the importance of making a
decision on Antelope Valley by the first of the year so that funding from
the Corps of Engineers would be available next spring.

In regard to the beltway, Figard said Mayor Wesely asked the beltway
consultant team to do everything they could to have the draft
environmental impact statement produced by the first of July. This did
occur. Since that time, the State Department of Roads, the County
Engineer's office, City staff, the beltway study team, the Federal
Highway Administration and the Historical Society have been meeting and
are close to having a draft document which can then be sent on to the
merge agencies, i.e., Federal Transit Authority, the Environmental
Protection Agency, etc., for their review prior to public release. The
goal is that by the first to middle of October, this document would be
signed by the federal government and sent to the merge agencies. By the
first of next year, these agencies should have completed their review
after which the beltway's draft environmental impact statement could be
released to the public. This would start a 45-day window of open houses.
Public hearings could be held the first part of February into March
followed by a 15-day comment period. After this point, the beltway
document would come back to the Planning Department/Planning Commission.
Elected officials would then have all the information (social, economic
and environmental) to begin the decision-making process regarding whether
a beltway is consistent with future growth. Figard said an amendment
would be needed at the Comprehensive Plan level, if not the
transportation level, should the beltway be included in the Comprehensive
Plan as a future strategy.

Figard noted that Antelope Valley is clearly a city-owned and sponsored
project. On the other hand, there has not been a decision on whether the
beltway should be considered a state highway, a city street or part of
county infrastructure. This debate will need to be ironed out once the
community agrees a beltway is consistent with future planning. He and
Allan Abbott, Director of City Public Works & Utilities, will be meeting
with the State next week to entertain discussions regarding this issue.
Figard added that, in his opinion, the beltway should not be a city
street. He feels it is more consistent with the state transportation
system. If the Comprehensive Plan embodies the beltway, it would enable
staff to work out details such as ownership, funding, schedules and
construction.

Workman said he has asked that the beltway be discussed at the September
and October Common meetings from the standpoint of keeping apprised of
developments. He added that he is unsure what will exactly be addressed
at that time but presumed that a simple question/answer session may be
conducted.

In regard to the east beltway, Camp asked if any consideration was given
to just doing three major arterials on section lines with a collection at
the top and bottom to help avoid a lot of controversy. Figard said
specifically or generically, yes. Part of the study included the
question, "Do we truly need an expressway-type facility or can the
existing arterial or mile-line roads meet that same need?" He said the
study suggested that as the community grows, just widening mile-line
roadways to four or six lanes will not necessarily satisfy the real needs
of future traffic around that area. Camp said he spoke with Doug
Bereuter recently who feels there is a real concern about getting the
south beltway going and to maybe avoid more controversy by going even
farther east. Figard said the next Common meeting may be a better time
to discuss the beltway planning process and what might be priority for
building it now versus later. He added that as Lincoln grows, every
mile-line road (84th, 98th, 120th Streets) will
still need to be improved, as well as an expressway constructed to
circulate increasing traffic around the community since mile-line
roadways will not fulfill this need and purpose.

In reference to Exhibit D, #9, "Needs Analysis Study Areas", Campbell
said Yankee Hill Road is pictured as a four-lane arterial. There have
been concerns from residents in the Wilderness Park/Highway 77/Yankee
Hill Road area that this road will become the south beltway with truck
traffic using it instead of Highway 2. She asked what time table is
associated with the "Needs Analysis Study Area." Morgan said it will be
part of the next Comprehensive Plan update. He added that Yankee Hill
Road will really not be pulling traffic off of the beltway. Campbell
asked that this concern be considered as the planning process moves
forward.

Heier noted that the beltway is entering its sixth year of study even
though a decision was supposed to be made last year. He asked how much
longer before some decision is made as people have been very patient with
the City and County during this process. Figard said while he is
disappointed and embarrassed that the process has taken this long, he is
confident that the only slack between now and the first of the year is
how long it will take the federal agencies to review the environmental
report. The Planning Department has done a good job and he is more
confident this year that the project will stay on the latest schedule.
He stressed that the decisions officials will be making this winter and
spring will affect this community for the next 100 years and, therefore,
should not be taken lightly. At the same time, this is no excuse for
dragging out the process as long as it has been.

Hudkins said he is also dismayed that the decision is now scheduled for
next February. He really hoped that a conclusion could have been made in
November or December. In regard to Yankee Hill Road, he questioned why
the improvement/widening of 14th Street to at least Saltillo or
even the south bypass has not been mentioned. Figard said expansion in
other areas provided adequate capacity. Hudkins asked staff to review
this concept as residents and businesses in that area feel 14th
Street is the best shot from Highway 2.

Fortenberry said one of the difficulties in choosing the east beltway
route is the fact that there has not been a comprehensive look at the
future of the east side of the community in terms of planning until
recently. He wondered if these efforts shouldn't be so closely
coordinated that they are almost inseparable because in moving to the
east, the rural character of the area is so attractive. Urbanizing it
will remove this desirability. Creative ways of preserving this rural
character, i.e., agricultural and environmental needs, should be sought,
while at the same time allowing for appropriate types of development and
infrastructure improvement.

Figard noted that if an east beltway is constructed allowing people to
get in, out and by the community, from a land use standpoint, there are
mechanisms to not allow urban sprawl to happen. He added that there
needs to be an agreement on why the beltway is being constructed - is it
just to provide another area for new commercial development or for
traffic to move around better? Just because a beltway may be
constructed, this should not be an excuse to leap-frog development to
that area.

Sellman said the Stevens Creek Basin initiative and the beltway decision
are running parallel and will influence each other. Timing is good and
will allow staff to look at land use specifics of both projects so no
opportunities are precluded.

There was a question regarding Pennsylvania and Humphrey Streets (located
north of Interstate 80, between N. 1st & N. 14th
Streets). Morgan said it is virtually impossible to allow adequate
traffic flow across Fletcher Street from 1st to 14th
Street. He added that a great deal of commercial and residential
development is going on in the area and Pennsylvania and Humphrey Streets
need to help people access the area with through traffic utilizing Alvo
to Highway 34. Improvements will be made on 14th Street to
Superior Street. Morgan added that another issue to consider is traffic
coming off Antelope Valley and the I-180 corridor.

Workman commented that he noticed an interim truck route was included
along 84th Street while the beltway is being constructed. He
inquired why 148th Street wasn't indicated as such and whether
it was because it is too far from the City. Figard said he wasn't able
to answer this question. Workman then said 98th Street from
Cornhusker Highway to Waverly Road is designated to be paved in the
future. He wondered if this is due to road counts or plans to make
98th Street a through street. Figard said the decision was not
based on road counts. He added that for residents, this street is the
one of few which goes all the way through and, therefore, should be
preserved as a connection.

Figard said the public way corridor vision happens from two different
directions - elected officials and the visual impact of those entering
our community/infrastructure improvements. It was decided that corridors
are needed which provide flexibility for the future in terms of
landscaping, pedestrian movement and trails, as well as the visual
pleasure of driving through a street. He added that corridors are
intended to provide an avenue for the future regarding quality of life
and reduction of agony if, in fact, growth suggests the need for wider
roads. Work will be done with developers to set aside wider space or an
agreement on an easement to prevent construction abutting rights-of-way.
Cost and maintenance issues will also be addressed in the future.

Lynn Johnson said it must be made clear to developers that not every
mile-line road will have a 140' right-of-way since many concerns from the
community have been received. Figard said the public way corridor plan
is broad visioned so that during the next 50-100 years, this concept can
be applied, eliminating the tight corridors seen today. Seng said while
this visionary approach is exactly what officials have been wishing for,
the map outlining the corridors has been scaring people. She added that
flexibility will be a key issue. Campbell said it should be made clear
to the community that there will be some equity on both sides of a road
and that there will be multiple ways to approach the project. Figard
said staff will come up with a different map.

A joint hearing between the City Council and County Board regarding the
LRTP will be scheduled in October.

By order of the Chair, the September 15th City-County Common
meeting will begin at 7:30 a.m. (NOTE: Due to a scheduling conflict
on the part of County Commissioner Larry Hudkins, the Common meeting on
Friday, September 15, 2000 will begin at 8:15 a.m.)

ADULT BUSINESSES

Sellman commented that she met with the County Board who requested this
issue be placed on the Common agenda because of a concern that future
County regulations governing sexually oriented businesses be consistent
with City regulations. She and City Attorney Dana Roper spoke with the
City Council who provided the direction to limit the regulatory proposal
at this time to live adult entertainment establishments. To date, no
legislation has been drafted.

Sellman proposed that the County look at a resolution which would
establish locations for live adult entertainment establishments. This
would require the addition of three definitions for both City and County
legislation: 1) adult cabaret; 2) specified anatomical areas; and 3)
specified sexual activities. In the County's zoning resolution, an
amendment would be made allowing this use only in industrial zoned
districts. This could be done by a special use permit including a public
hearing before the County Board OR a conditional use permit, whereby if
the applicant comes forward and meets all requirements, the permit could
be issued administratively.

Sellman indicated that there are eight industrial locations within
Lancaster County. They tend to be long and narrow which causes the
implementation of a separation requirement from different types of zoned
districts surrounding industrial districts to be very difficult. The
industrial zoned districts in the County could be designated and certain
types of conditions established for a permit but, on the other hand,
because of the shape and size, it may be that conditions cannot be
established.

With regard to the City's proposal (including the three-mile zoning
area), a look will be given to specific industrial and highway commercial
districts where it may be appropriate to establish a permanent
requirement. Again, this could be a special use permit (requiring a
public hearing) OR a conditional use permit (issued administratively).
Sellman felt the latter would be the most efficient way of handling these
requests. It was noted that districts will have to be carefully
established taking into consideration secondary affects, separating live
adult entertainment businesses from each other, and separating these
businesses from other zoned districts which may be less compatible (AGR
and residential districts R-1 through R-8). Other users were identified
which may be incompatible with live adult entertainment establishments:
child care centers, hospitals, recreation areas, correctional facilities;
and treatment centers.

Sellman noted that distance requirements are not consistent across the
country, ranging from 200' to 1,000'. A map was prepared outlining I-1,
I-3, H-3 and H-4 districts, although, she stated these are not the only
ones which can be used. A 1,000' separation buffer was mapped from the
edge of these districts and the AGR and residential districts. The
buffer was also applied to any County zoning adjacent to these zoned
districts within the three-mile area that indicates urban-type
development is likely in the near future. A 600' buffer was also mapped.
Sellman added that these models are not proposals - but are conceptual
only.

If this process moves forward, Sellman said decisions will need to be
made today regarding:

Which districts should the County and City pursue (including the
three-mile zoned area)?

What are the conditions/uses for providing a buffer space?

Should this use permit require a public hearing or can it be issued
administratively to an applicant meeting the established conditions?

If the City and County proposals are to be before the Planning Commission
on September 6th, answers to these questions will need to be
known so the County's legal ad can be forwarded to the newspaper by
August 21. The City's legal ad is due on August 23.
If officials are not prepared to make these decisions today, another
Planning Commission date will need to be considered.

Cook said he feels the zoning approach is the appropriate approach with
regard to the City, but future litigation must be avoided, especially
when an applicant meets all the necessary requirements but the
application is denied anyway. He thought a conditional use permit may be
the way to go, although, the County may desire a different approach.
Also, highway, commercial and industrial districts seem appropriate areas
for this type of business and a 600' (two block) spacing requirement is
reasonable. He did find a zoning code in another city which placed
restrictions on signage.

Sellman commented that new zoning requirements would apply only to new
establishments; existing establishments, if operating lawfully, would not
be affected to the extent that they remain the same size and operation.
She said it appears that the location housing Cheetah's would have been
affected by these regulations. If the business is operating lawfully at
this time, it would become a lawful, non-conforming use under the
proposed zoning scheme.

Heier stated that he wanted to make it clear to the public that
government MUST allow this type of entertainment to exist in a specific
area and that officials cannot ban live adult entertainment from the
community. Sellman said there are court decisions which have tested this
issue. The language which was handed down refers to "ample alternative
avenues of communication" meaning that other properties do have to exist
where these businesses could locate. She added that the hours of
operation should be reasonable and public utilities must be available to
these sites. Officials would really only have a say on time, place and
manner of these businesses.

Fortenberry said City Attorney Dana Roper may be able to comment further
on Commissioner Heier's question with regard to the City because he did
not believe all the facts stated were correct. He added that he has a
problem pushing live adult entertainment businesses onto to those who
have invested in industrial areas. Also, he felt that today's
presentation is giving the impression that this is the direction the City
is going to take. There is a parallel discussion taking place on whether
the City ought to require, through a public nudity ordinance, more
stringent regulations, though, this may not help the County much in the
three-mile area. He went on to say that proceeding with zoning
regulations to aid the County is most appropriate but the County may want
to lobby the State for empowerment to pass more stringent public nudity
ordinances.
Fortenberry noted that Omaha does not seem to have any problems with this
public nudity. Evidently, they have outlawed adult entertainment in
liquor establishments but do not prohibit public nudity in juice bars.
But because of vigorous enforcement, Fortenberry said Omaha has dealt
with these businesses successfully. He suggested referring to these
establishments as "sexually oriented businesses" instead of adult
entertainment. He added that this issue has been terribly divisive and
horrific to residents, therefore, officials need to act swiftly and
strongly to prevent more sexually oriented businesses from cropping up in
Lincoln and Lancaster County.

Roper commented that there are some legislative abilities as the Supreme
Court has addressed "pasties and g-strings." There are also communities
which have required more body parts to be covered and have not had their
legislation challenged by the Supreme Court. He added that there has not
been any change recommended to the B-4 district (downtown area).

Seng said she started out thinking zoning districts were the way to go
but after seeing these areas mapped out, it would be really tough on the
industrial zoned areas of the City to absorb all the sexually oriented
businesses. Doing so could really hurt areas, such as Cornhusker Highway
and West "O" Street, which are designated for entry way improvement.
Sellman noted that there was a suggestion to separate adult businesses
from each other by 1,500' to prevent clustering.

Camp indicated that he sees three levels for consideration:

What are the legal parameters? (Direction is needed from legal staffs
because the difference in restrictions of the City and County is
confusing. His goal is to have a unified approach.)

If the City and County can ban sexually oriented businesses, do
officials want to?

If sexually oriented businesses are allowed, how will they be
regulated, where should they be permitted and what restrictions should
be placed on them?

Campbell indicated that from the County's perspective, she would want
adult businesses to go through the special permit process as the public
has the right to make comments. Cook said he understands the desire for
public comment but worries about people having a false idea of what
governing bodies can do with regard to these businesses. He added that
this situation goes beyond what normal special permits would cover
because it involves the freedom of speech issue and courts may have an
extra level of scrutiny, i.e., is local government improperly censoring
someone's ability to express themselves. Workman said he agrees with
Campbell's comment regarding the special hearing; he also agrees with
Fortenberry that adult businesses are terrible for our community. He
questioned whether officials would want to go out on a limb by being
creative and coming up with other requirements besides zoning.

Dave Johnson said the County only has powers which the State allows and,
therefore, has less power than the City. There are some other
possibilities - zoning being only one of them. He will continue to
research options, trying to come as close as possible to what the City
would like to approve. Workman asked if dress and age restrictions could
be instituted. Dave Johnson said these issues may overlap law
enforcement jurisdiction and should be kept separate. He added that
there are a number of cases which indicate local government can have some
regulations as long as they do not conflict with liquor statutes. Also,
he asked officials to keep in mind that liquor, nudity and zoning issues
are very different and would follow different case law.

Hudkins said the City does have zoning authority within the three-mile
area and some of these residents feel that decisions are being made
without direct elected representation. He agreed with Campbell that
holding a public hearing on adult entertainment applications is the best
route to go.

Sheriff Wagner said he is glad the City and County are discussing adult
businesses because often times the ripple effect happens whereby if the
City of Lincoln has too stringent of regulations, these businesses may
move to other locations/communities in the County. He urged villages
within the County to adopt similar legislation as to prevent this from
happening. Officials should also be aware that businesses are attracted
to rural areas to avoid the City's zoning restrictions and because they
know the County does not have as many law enforcement resources as the
City. In reference to juice bars, he said these businesses cater to the
18-20 year old crowd who have income potential but no place to go for
adult entertainment since most places have liquor licenses.

Campbell said Sellman is looking for answers today and based on
Fortenberry's and Camp's questions, legal advice is necessary. She said
she understands the City is wrestling with the question of whether you
can totally ban adult businesses. She suggested starting on a zoning
tool, knowing that the other tools may have to come along later. The
City Council was urged to discuss this issue on Monday during a pre-
council meeting. The County Board will also discuss the issue
again next week and forward answers to Sellman shortly thereafter. It
was not sure if the September 6th deadline would be met.

Fortenberry said while the City does need to find a mechanism to help the
County's immediate problem, zoning is not the long-run solution. He does
not want to see a temporary solution end up being the long-run solution.

Cook added that delaying the process may provide for some missed
opportunities, i.e., extra time could allow Cheetah's to open as a juice
bar which would then be grand fathered under new legislation. He would
like to see something move forward for the September 6th Planning
Commission agenda even if it is not exactly what everyone likes - more
detail could be added later. Seng commented that while zoning is just
one piece of a very large puzzle, it should move forward. She requested
copies of a map outlining the different industrial and highway zones.
Workman also agreed on the zoning approach as a prelude to additional
requirements.

Campbell asked the City Council to consider a change to zoning ordinances
and to forward answers to Sellman's questions in the next couple of weeks
so that by the end of September, the issue could be before the Planning
Commission. Each body can review the issue with the Planning Department
and respective legal staff and if in agreement, legislation could then be
produced. If the City Council is not comfortable with this approach,
they were asked to notify the County so the Board can proceed from their
end.

Fortenberry inquired whether the zoning mechanism will help the County.
Campbell said they do not know. Fortenberry said to keep in mind that
zoning alone is not the final solution.

Cook commented that it seems the idea today is not to push for the zoning
change to be on the September 6th Planning Commission agenda.
He said his intent is to have something in place which will withstand
legal scrutiny and get the job done under the circumstances. He added
that amendments are always possible in the future.

Seng asked if Planning could get maps to the City Council by Monday.
Sellman indicated that this would be possible. Fortenberry said he will
try to schedule a pre-council meeting on adult business zoning for
Monday, August 21, 2000.